DavidS wrote:They also need to change the way the whole regime is policed. The time it took for Contador's case to be resolved was ridiculous and one can only conclude they were not serious in prosecuting the charges.

That's a tough one to call. Due process takes time and it's wrong for those in power to intervene on a legal process.

Never been a fan, nor am i here to knock the man down. but this is how i see it

He was caught, and it may have been years after, and by accident althou he has always been suspect in winning so many TDFand to add to it, his team mates couldn't live with the lie....The lie, Lance had to live it, it was Livestrong it was the brand

He was able to hide the positive results with doctors and using his name of Livestrong....blackmailed the testing agenciesLance is very head strong and do it my way attitude, no 1 said no to Lance....He made him self powerful financially to hush up any results with the live strong brand and his personal donations...

Lance still has a hold on some sponsors, hence why he stood down a deal with his sponsors to still keep Livestrong going....without Lance steering the brand the sponsors do get credit in helping cancer research but not the man that was Livestrong.....

and UCI where corrupt by Lances performance he made the sport and the sport made Lance Armstrong, doping was a bad tool to use to do it

2. Declare that there is no real evidence, only hearsay, and that there was no failed test (only an anomaly)

McQuaid’s predecessor Hein Verbruggen has been somewhat less circumspect, telling De Telegraaf in a text message that: “All I can say is that there are many, many stories and suspicions, but no trace of PROOF. There is none. LA [Armstrong] never tested positive, not even by USADA."

Amazingly, McQuaid tried to defend taking the "donation" from Armstrong. He claimed there wasn't a conflict of interest because LA hadn't failed a drug test at the Tour de Suisse in 2001! Interesting argument. So it wasn't a conflict of interest for the UCI to receive a "donation" from a guy that has won several TdFs, been given a back-dated TUE at the 1999 TdF and delivered a "suspicious" test result at the 2001 Tour de Suisse. Pat also claimed the UCI was transpatent about the "donation" even though it took seven years to be revealed and even then he didn't allow a reporter to see the receipt for the Sysmex machine bought with the "donation". How can Pat keep his job?

biker jk wrote:Amazingly, McQuaid tried to defend taking the "donation" from Armstrong. He claimed there wasn't a conflict of interest because LA hadn't failed a drug test at the Tour de Suisse in 2001! Interesting argument. So it wasn't a conflict of interest for the UCI to receive a "donation" from a guy that has won several TdFs, been given a back-dated TUE at the 1999 TdF and delivered a "suspicious" test result at the 2001 Tour de Suisse. Pat also claimed the UCI was transpatent about the "donation" even though it took seven years to be revealed and even then he didn't allow a reporter to see the receipt for the Sysmex machine bought with the "donation". How can Pat keep his job?

Wasn't there something like a $37,000 difference in the price of the machine and the amount that LA 'donated''?

There's a lot of people calling it "validation", and a lot of people calling it "witch hunt". Evidence has been provided, and the defendant/s found guilty as charged by two panels, which has opened up a heck of a lot of potential civil worm-cans (i.e. the winning bonuses, among others).

If I was a professional in the sport, I'd be massively dirty on everyone involved. Just as I'd be dirty on someone in my line of business making money off me by cheating, and the governing body covering it up, or being so inept that they missed it all. But I'm not a pro. I'm just an amateur cyclist who rides for enjoyment and fitness, who also happens to watch a bit of racing. Do I feel a little peeved about the cover-up? Yes. Does it surprise me, the level of cover-up? Yes. Does it surprise me people have doped? Not at all.

Another example: a mate of mine is involved in high level sports coaching. Inner circle talk from a few years back went that several of the top ranked men in this certain sport were all doing something, but nobody had caught them. Given this result, time may yet catch them, and we'll see the 'dirty pro cycling' tag encompass other sports. US baseball and the NFL got through it, somewhat.

The LA thing will be closer to over when he goes to gaol for perjury, he will lose his $ and have to write a come clean book and appear on Oprah. That will be LA over, whilst he still has millions to his name people will see that cheaters prosper.

The UCI is a joke, cycling ca not move anywhere with those clowns at the top. A rival governing body should open up sign riders on and get things done properly.

UCI is making BNSW look like an excellent organisation! :S I sincerely hope they sort UCI out, I would be loathe to sign up to Cycling Australia again next year which is basically a vote for the UCI and poor governance.

Sydguy wrote:The LA thing will be closer to over when he goes to gaol for perjury, he will lose his $ and have to write a come clean book and appear on Oprah. That will be LA over, whilst he still has millions to his name people will see that cheaters prosper.

The UCI is a joke, cycling ca not move anywhere with those clowns at the top. A rival governing body should open up sign riders on and get things done properly.

UCI is making BNSW look like an excellent organisation! :S I sincerely hope they sort UCI out, I would be loathe to sign up to Cycling Australia again next year which is basically a vote for the UCI and poor governance.

JM

If we had Michael Turtur's email address we could tell him what we think about the UCI. He's on the UCI management committee which meets on Friday. Asking for McQuaid to resign for a start and Hein Verbruggen ("There is nothing. I repeat again: Lance Armstrong has never used doping. Never, never, never. I say this not because I am a friend of his, because that is not true. I say it because I'm sure.") to lose his honorary president of the UCI title.

Sydguy wrote:The LA thing will be closer to over when he goes to gaol for perjury, he will lose his $ and have to write a come clean book and appear on Oprah. That will be LA over, whilst he still has millions to his name people will see that cheaters prosper.

The UCI is a joke, cycling ca not move anywhere with those clowns at the top. A rival governing body should open up sign riders on and get things done properly.

UCI is making BNSW look like an excellent organisation! :S I sincerely hope they sort UCI out, I would be loathe to sign up to Cycling Australia again next year which is basically a vote for the UCI and poor governance.

JM

If we had Michael Turtur's email address we could tell him what we think about the UCI. He's on the UCI management committee which meets on Friday. Asking for McQuaid to resign for a start and Hein Verbruggen ("There is nothing. I repeat again: Lance Armstrong has never used doping. Never, never, never. I say this not because I am a friend of his, because that is not true. I say it because I'm sure.") to lose his honorary president of the UCI title.

The thing that concerns me is that one person can be both an administrator of the sport that makes decisions on things such as the status awarded to professional cycling events, as well as be a promoter of an event that benefits from such decisions.

It's conflicts of interest like this that are at the heart of the long term systemic problems, of which doping is a large and obvious symptom.

There are a number of such conflicts of interest at both UCI and CA level.

Sydguy wrote:The LA thing will be closer to over when he goes to gaol for perjury, he will lose his $ and have to write a come clean book and appear on Oprah. That will be LA over, whilst he still has millions to his name people will see that cheaters prosper.

The UCI is a joke, cycling ca not move anywhere with those clowns at the top. A rival governing body should open up sign riders on and get things done properly.

UCI is making BNSW look like an excellent organisation! :S I sincerely hope they sort UCI out, I would be loathe to sign up to Cycling Australia again next year which is basically a vote for the UCI and poor governance.

JM

Setting up a rival peak body if, and only if, it was to correct past UCI injustices, such as the ex post facto ban of recumbents and the reinstatement of records set in the 1930s (the UCI has a lot of form).

toolonglegs wrote:I notice Cadel has now admitted working with Ferrari as well ... still more muck to be flung around .

Phrasing it "has now admitted..." implies something sinister and kept under wraps. cf that with "has confirmed".

My understanding is that it has been a matter fo public record, that he met and talked to the guy around 2000. No secret, no denial, no reason to at the time. Six degrees of separation sorta thing until something more comes up. I think in fairness you should rephrase.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.